Daisy Grewal

Bio

I am a social psychologist who is broadly interested in how academic and workplace environments impact people’s motivations to succeed. I first came to Stanford in 2006 to work with Professor Carol Dweck while I was finishing up my dissertation in the Yale psychology department. Since then I have worked as an applied researcher in several different roles at the university. My current position is in the Office of the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education, where I conduct internal research studies that seek to understand and improve the undergraduate experience. I am especially interested in the application of social science research methods to real-world settings.

Current Role at Stanford

My current role involves collecting, analyzing, and reporting on information that can be used to guide thoughtful decision-making about undergraduate programs and policies. Often this information is collected directly from students, faculty, and staff through surveys, interviews, and focus groups. Depending on the question being investigated, I may also extract and analyze quantitative data from our institutional databases. My role also involves providing related consultative services to VPUE staff who are conducting their own program evaluation studies.

Abstract

One challenge academic health centers face is to advance female faculty to leadership positions and retain them there in numbers equal to men, especially given the equal representation of women and men among graduates of medicine and biological sciences over the last 10 years. The purpose of this study is to investigate the explicit and implicit biases favoring men as leaders, among both men and women faculty, and to assess whether these attitudes change following an educational intervention.The authors used a standardized, 20-minute educational intervention to educate faculty about implicit biases and strategies for overcoming them. Next, they assessed the effect of this intervention. From March 2012 through April 2013, 281 faculty members participated in the intervention across 13 of 18 clinical departments.The study assessed faculty members' perceptions of bias as well as their explicit and implicit attitudes toward gender and leadership. Results indicated that the intervention significantly changed all faculty members' perceptions of bias (P < .05 across all eight measures). Although, as expected, explicit biases did not change following the intervention, the intervention did have a small but significant positive effect on the implicit biases surrounding women and leadership of all participants regardless of age or gender (P = .008).These results suggest that providing education on bias and strategies for reducing it can serve as an important step toward reducing gender bias in academic medicine and, ultimately, promoting institutional change, specifically the promoting of women to higher ranks.

Abstract

Gender stereotypes in science impede supportive environments for women. Research suggests that women's perceptions of these environments are influenced by stereotype threat (ST): anxiety faced in situations where one may be evaluated using negative stereotypes. This study developed and tested ST metrics for first time use with junior faculty in academic medicine.Under a 2012 National Institutes of Health Pathfinder Award, Stanford School of Medicine's Office of Diversity and Leadership, working with experienced clinicians, social scientists, and epidemiologists, developed and administered ST measures to a representative group of junior faculty.174 School of Medicine junior faculty were recruited (62% women, 38% men; 75% assistant professors, 25% instructors; 50% white, 40% Asian, 10% underrepresented minority). Women reported greater susceptibility to ST than did men across all items including ST vulnerability (p 0.42).Innovative ST metrics can provide a more complete picture of academic medical center environments. While junior women faculty are susceptible to ST, they may not yet experience all of its consequences in their early careers. As such, ST metrics offer a tool for evaluating institutional initiatives to increase supportive environments for women in academic medicine.

Abstract

To assess whether the proportion of women faculty, especially at the full professor rank, increased from 2004 to 2010 at Stanford University School of Medicine after a multifaceted intervention.The authors surveyed gender composition and faculty satisfaction five to seven years after initiating a multifaceted intervention to expand recruitment and development of women faculty. The authors assessed pre/post relative change and rates of increase in women faculty at each rank, and faculty satisfaction; and differences in pre/post change and estimated rate of increase between Stanford and comparator cohorts (nationally and at peer institutions).Post intervention, women faculty increased by 74% (234 to 408), with assistant, associate, and full professors increasing by 66% (108 to 179), 87% (74 to 138), and 75% (52 to 91), respectively. Nationally and at peer institutions, women faculty increased by about 30% (30,230 to 39,200 and 4,370 to 5,754, respectively), with lower percentages at each rank compared with Stanford. Estimated difference (95% CI) in annual rate of increase was larger for Stanford versus the national cohort: combined ranks 0.36 (0.17 to 0.56), P = .001; full professor 0.40 (0.18 to 0.62), P = .001; and versus the peer cohort: combined ranks 0.29 (0.07 to 0.51), P = .02; full professor 0.37 (0.14 to 0.60), P = .003. Stanford women faculty satisfaction increased from 48% (2003) to 71% (2008).Increased satisfaction and proportion of women faculty, especially full professors, suggest that the intervention may ameliorate the gender gap in academic medicine.

Abstract

The Department of Graduate Medical Education at Stanford Hospital and Clinics has developed a professional training program for program directors. This paper outlines the goals, structure, and expected outcomes for the one-year Fellowship in Graduate Medical Education Administration program.The skills necessary for leading a successful Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) training program require an increased level of curricular and administrative expertise. To meet the ACGME Outcome Project goals, program directors must demonstrate not only sophisticated understanding of curricular design but also competency-based performance assessment, resource management, and employment law. Few faculty-development efforts adequately address the complexities of educational administration. As part of an institutional-needs assessment, 41% of Stanford program directors indicated that they wanted more training from the Department of Graduate Medical Education.To address this need, the Fellowship in Graduate Medical Education Administration program will provide a curriculum that includes (1) readings and discussions in 9 topic areas, (2) regular mentoring by the director of Graduate Medical Education (GME), (3) completion of a service project that helps improve GME across the institution, and (4) completion of an individual scholarly project that focuses on education.The first fellow was accepted during the 2008-2009 academic year. Outcomes for the project include presentation of a project at a national meeting, internal workshops geared towards disseminating learning to peer program directors, and the completion of a GME service project. The paper also discusses lessons learned for improving the program.

Abstract

The relation between emotional intelligence, assessed with a performance measure, and positive workplace outcomes was examined in 44 analysts and clerical employees from the finance department of a Fortune 400 insurance company. Emotionally intelligent individuals received greater merit increases and held higher company rank than their counterparts. They also received better peer and/or supervisor ratings of interpersonal facilitation and stress tolerance than their counterparts. With few exceptions, these associations remained statistically significant after controlling for other predictors, one at a time, including age, gender, education, verbal ability, the Big Five personality traits, and trait affect.